In this text, the author challenges the method used in law to assess damage caused to individuals by mass media in defamation cases. He shows that, while mass media reach a wide audience, their real influence on individuals who read, watch or listen to them is far from obvious. According to Langelier, a number of factors have to be taken into account in order to assess the real damage caused to individuals in cases of defamation. The factors include knowledge in the social sciences about the media’s potential influence on individual opinion formation, the degree of penetration of the medium in question, the composition of the target audience, the social context in which the medium operates, the social use of media in the society in question, the media’s degree of credibility in the society, the relative importance of the media in relation to one another, and public interest. After examining each of these factors in the context of Canadian society, the author concludes that media influence on the formation of public and individual opinions is relatively weak, if not non-existent. Consequently, he finds inappropriate the approach, point of view and methods used in law to determine damages in defamation cases. He thus calls on legal practitioners to break with the presuppositions and myths, and to adopt a more accurate and realistic approach to such cases.